Quote:
Originally Posted by Midtowner
That depends on how the surveys are distributed. Someone who felt violated would feel more inclined to respond whereas if my experience at the border involved the ICE officer giving me some crap about the empty pony keg I was bringing back from Canada as a souvenir, I probably wouldn't take the time out of my day.
|
The method of survey distribution (such as the coercion you mention) has nothing to do with the survey sample. It does affect the validity of a survey, but a different aspect of it. Like I said, take a statistics course. It's very enlightening.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Midtowner
And we're talking about a lot more than 1 million travelers. We're talking about everyone who crossed the border within the last couple years. That's a lot of people. 100 responses isn't good enough to make a general conclusion. Not even the paper says that 7% of travelers have their laptops confiscated, just that it has happened seven times that we know about.
|
My point was not to say, "oh we have a million travelers, so we need 384 respondents," but to say that for a sample size of 100, you're only representing a population of 135, but for a sample size of 384, an addition of a mere 284 survey respondents, you're now representing a population of a million, a difference of 999,900. It doesn't require the response of EVERYONE who crossed the border in the past two years, just a proportionally representative number, which I have shown is a smaller actual number than one might think.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Midtowner
It's a law school habit. In analyzing a Constitutional issue, it's good to bring up the close calls and tell why they aren't applicable or when they might be, but aren't yet.
The 9th Circuit. This is the most overturned appellate court in the United States at any level. Take what they say with a big 'ol grain of salt in most cases.
Here, I think they're right.
That doesn't mean that an argument can't be made either way. The ACLU and the EFF sure think so anyhow.
No, they're taking the property for the reasonable period of time it takes to search it. You need to understand what's going on here. I won't explain it a third time. Scroll back up and re-read if you care to  |
I think you deliberately misunderstand my point. I won't get into it again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Midtowner
Yes, just as I explained in the side-discussions with Toad re: seizure and the DMCA.
|
And you took this out of context since I was using the example to make the point you're trying to deliberately misunderstand, above. But hey...feel free.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Midtowner
This ain't Jim Crow.
|
Yes, and this was somewhat unrelated to the other comments, but if you'll notice, I said so in a later comment.